Maxim Institute - real issues - No. 82

Contents: *
Smacking versus violence A tragedy promoted calls to
outlaw smacking, but advocates consistently ignore some
important points. * The 'Peter Ellis' syndrome A new
report shows that fewer men are entering primary teaching.
Is PC to blame? * Reforming divorce law Australian
research proposes divorce law changes equally applicable to
New Zealand.

The smacking debate

The tragic death of
6-year-old Coral Burrows has prompted calls from the Prime
Minister, Social Services Minister, Steve Maharey, and the
Commissioner for Children to remove Section 59 of the Crimes
Act. This section allows parents to use 'reasonable force'
when disciplining their children.

But let's be clear:
Section 59 does not advocate smacking; it allows for
reasonable parental force, which may include smacking.
Obviously, responsible parents use a range of measures, and
in no way is it a licence to beat children. Moreover, there
is a consistent failure among child advocates to see that
family dysfunction is a cause of abuse and that smacking
and violence are poles apart. There is no evidence that
smacking leads to violence, and the law is quite clear about
the difference between the two.

When used properly,
smacking is a quick correction to bring a child's behaviour
back into line; it seeks to restore the parent-child
relationship affected by the child's unacceptable
behaviour. If done in a context of stable and committed
family relationships, it is motivated by love and a
commitment to the child's best interests. As children
develop, most parents naturally use it less and
less.

Abuse, however, is belting, punching, or beating. It
is motivated by anger, frustration, revenge or some other
volatile desire to 'get back at' the child. Abuse aims to
inflict pain, revenge or humiliation. It is often
associated with parental neglect, dictatorial control,
indulgence and incompetence, and unstable and uncommitted
relationships. Making smacking illegal will criminalise
responsible parents, but will do nothing to stop
abusers.

The Peter Ellis syndrome

Men are not entering
early childhood or primary teaching as they used to. One
researcher has called this the Peter Ellis syndrome. It's
hardly surprising in light of this case that fewer men are
applying for these positions, or that those working in
these areas are frustrated and fearful. Political
correctness (PC) does that to people.

One teacher in his
late 20s has said, "The Ministry [of Education] tells you
that you are never to be alone with a child, but sometimes
the situation you find yourself in dictates that there is
no other option. Sometimes you just have to ignore them.
They [the rules] are just so PC, it's ridiculous."

A
report from the primary teachers' union, the NZEI, has found
that more than 80 percent of teachers are women. Men make
up only 18 percent of primary teachers-a drop from 22
percent 10 years ago and the percentage will continue to
fall.

Given the cases of abuse that have come to light,
it's understandable that teacher unions and the Ministry of
Education are handing out 'no touch' warnings. Teachers
abusing those in their care cannot be tolerated. But when
we confuse these cases with hugging a five year-old who has
grazed her knee, or whose pet has died, we've lost the plot.
PC has increased our awareness, but has taken away our
ability to discriminate between helpful touch and abusive
touch, and created a climate of suspicion.

Reforming
divorce law

Barry Maley a senior fellow at Australia's
Centre for Independent Studies (CIS) argues Australian
divorce law is eroding confidence in marriage and creating
opportunities for partners to exploit their spouses. In
_Reforming Divorce Law_, released this month, Maley outlines
two proposals for divorce law reform. One makes divorce
subject to mutual consent. The other opens up the
possibility for serious marital misconduct to influence a
divorce settlement. He suggests that ill-formed divorce law
is a factor in high divorce rates, a decline in the birth
rate, and damaged wellbeing of both children and
adults.

In Australia the 1975 change to unilateral,
no-fault divorce banished the need to prove misconduct in a
marriage for divorce to take place. But it also allowed one
spouse to instigate divorce without the consent of the
other.

'No-fault divorce ignores the continuing reality of
serious marital misconduct. Its costs and damages are no
longer recognised by family law. It put an end to redress
and compensation for the mistreated spouse. It therefore
removed a disincentive to irresponsible, selfish, or
malicious behaviour within a marriage.'

Under present
no-fault divorce rules, both women and men are exposed to
exploitation in the event of divorce, which discourages
investment in marriage and having children. Maley's
proposals are aimed at transforming marriage into a serious
commitment that cannot be unilaterally revoked, and to
create disincentives for unilateral divorce and serious
marital misconduct.

'Reform should retain no fault divorce
where the spouses are agreed that they want to divorce, but
should remove unilateralism by requiring that all divorce
applications must have the consent of both husband and
wife.'

Maley's belief that reprehensible marital conduct
should not be ignored by the law is endorsed by nearly
three quarters of the Australian population according to a
recent AC Nielsen survey. Given New Zealand trends marriage
and divorce trends closely mirror those in Australia his
findings should be seriously considered in review of New
Zealand's no-fault divorce legislation introduced in the
Family Proceedings Act 1980.

A copy of the report is at:
www.cis.org.au/IssueAnalysis/ia39/IA39.pdf

THOUGHT FOR
THE WEEK - Margaret Atwood

A divorce is like an
amputation; you survive but there is less of you.

(Time, March 1973)

To subscribe send a blank email to:
realissues@maxim.org.nz

Real Issues is a weekly email
newsletter from the Maxim Institute. The focus is current
New Zealand events with an attempt to provide insight into
critical issues beyond what is usually presented in the
media. This service is provided free of charge, although a
donation to Maxim is appreciated. Items may be used for
other purposes, such as teaching, research or civic action.
If items are published elsewhere, Maxim should be
acknowledged.

In response to the challenges facing Scoop and the media industry we’ve instituted an Ethical Paywall to keep the news freely available to the public.
Organisations whose staff use Scoop at work need to be licensed through a ScoopPro subscription under this new model, these users get access to exclusive news tools.
If you love Scoop you can also support through a monthly donation as a Foundation Supporter.

Teachers and principals voted for a full day strike to be held on 15 August to send a strong message to the Government that the current collective agreement offers from the Ministry of Education would not fix the crisis in teaching.

"There needs to be better investment in education so every child can reach their potential and we have enough teachers for every class", said NZEI Te Riu Roa lead principal negotiator Louise Green. More>>

The former president of Australia’s Human Rights Commission Gillian Triggs says deportations have risen dramatically in Australia since 2014 when ministers and ministerial delegates were given the power to cancel visas - and half of those being deported are New Zealanders. "These are massive numbers, actually escalating dramatically."... More>>

Human rights organisation People Against Prisons Aotearoa says a prisoner they advocate for has had 9 boxes of legal documents seized from him just days before his case against the Department of Corrections was to be heard. More>>

Party Leader David Seymour today revealed his Smaller Government Bill which will reduce the size of Parliament to 100 MPs, limit the size of the Executive to 20 Ministers, and remove the Maori seats. More>>

ALSO:

Luckily, at least the European Union is standing up to the Washington bully – and the EU chose a press conference in Wellington this week to make its defence of the international rules-based system perfectly clear. More>>

ALSO:

The Mental Health Foundation is supportive of the news of a new, national mental health unit, but is more encouraged by the Minister’s comments that suggest more mental health initiatives will follow the Mental Health Inquiry. More>>